Page 104 - Cardiac testing for coronary artery disease in potential kidney transplant recipients

(Continued)

7. Reference standard results blinded (information bias) When the reference standard was interpreted knowing the index test
results, this may have led to the overestimation of diagnostic test accuracy.
Studieswere scored‘yes’ ifblindingof the reference standardwasexplicitly
stated in the article or if this was acknowledged by authors in subsequent
personal communication. Otherwise, the studies were marked ‘unclear’,
unless blinding was explicitly stated to be absent

8. Index test results blinded (information bias) When the index test results were interpreted without the knowledge of
results of the reference standard, or with more information than in prac-
tice, this may have resulted in bias, usually leading to an overestimation
of diagnostic accuracy. This item was scored ‘yes’ if blinding of the index
test was explicitly stated in the article or if this was acknowledged by
authors in subsequent personal communication. Otherwise, the studies
were marked ‘unclear’, unless blinding was explicitly stated to be absent

9. Relevant clinical information (information bias) The availability of clinical data during interpretation of test results may
have affected estimates of test performance. This item was scored ‘yes’
if the data available during the study of diagnostic test accuracy was the
same as that which would have been available in normal clinical practice

10. Uninterpretable results explained This item was scored ‘yes’ if uninterpretable results were explained or if
there were no uninterpretable results present. This item was scored ’no’
if uninterpretable results were found but not explained

11. Withdrawals explained Excluding patients from the study may have led to an overestimation
of diagnostic accuracy. This item was scored ‘yes’ if withdrawals were
explained or if there were no withdrawals from the study. This item
was scored ’no’ if there were withdrawals from the study, but these were
unexplained

H I S T O R Y

Protocol first published: Issue 9, 2010
Review first published: Issue 12, 2011

C O N T R I B U T I O N S O F A U T H O R S

• Louis W Wang: Designed and co-ordinated the review, collected data, undertook searches, screened search results, organised
study retrieval, screened retrieved studies against inclusion criteria, appraised study quality, extracted data, corresponded with study
authors to obtain additional information, data management, entry, analysis and interpretation, review writing.
• Angela C Webster: Designed and co-ordinated the review, corresponded with study authors to obtain additional information,
analysed and interpreted data, review writing, provided general advice on the review, performed previous work that was the
foundation of the current study, provided methodological and clinical perspectives (transplant physician).
• Magid A Fahim: Data collection, undertook searches, screened search results, screened retrieved studies against inclusion criteria,
appraised study quality, data extraction.
Cardiac testing for coronary artery disease in potential kidney transplant recipients (Review) 102
Copyright © 2011 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.